The Planning Policy Consultant introduced the report which set out the review of the Management Plan and asked Members to agree the Council’s formal response to the draft Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Management Plan.  She explained that Management Plans were required to be reviewed every five years, jointly with the 12 other authorities in Kent that had AONB areas, and she highlighted the changes from the previous Management Plan in the report.

The Planning Policy Consultant said that the Council had commented on the earlier, formal draft document and advised that the current consultation sought further views before its adoption.  She drew attention to the suggested response at Appendix II.

In response to a Member’s question on whether the wording around the definition of ‘setting’ had changed, the Planning Policy Consultant advised that it was similar to the current Management Plan although she advised that the AONB unit had recently published a position statement on ‘setting’, outlining its interpretation when considering development proposals, and this could be viewed on their website.  In the discussion that followed, the Member said that the wording was not strong enough to preserve the AONB as development could be built right up to the boundary of it.  She added that the setting position statement was a separate document not included in the policy and she suggested that it should be included in the policy to be easily identified. 

Members discussed the impact of polytunnels as referred to in the Management Plan on page 73 of the agenda and a Member said there needed to be a clearer position of expectation.

A Member said that biodiversity net gain must be achieved, and the Management Plan should be encouraging improvement, not just the maintenance of, biodiversity.  He said there needed to be a policy to support all individual sites such as back gardens and roadsides.  The Member said that overall biodiversity improvements on an acre by acre level, for the whole of the AONB, should be considered. In referring to 3.6 Sustainable development – principles on page 43 of the report, he said that a specific biodiversity enhancement policy should be added to the Management Plan.

A Member highlighted the contradiction of some of the responses in Appendix 2 which included information that did not support agreement with the question, whilst the strongly agree option was ticked, and he gave examples at questions 29, 53, and 57. He asked why there was no response to question 58?  The Planning Policy Consultant said this would be updated and clarified that no comments had been received to question 58.

A Member referred to the wording at paragraph 7.4, Shooting in woodlands on page 85 of the report and said that it was poorly explained as it seemed to be encouraging the shooting of birds to control grey squirrels.  She said that woodlands needed to be managed but shooting was not the only answer.  The majority of Members agreed and supported a request for feedback to be given on this.

In summary, the Planning Policy Consultant agreed to update the response to include:

·       More attention drawn to the impact of the setting of the AONB;

·       more detail on the impact of polytunnels;

·       reinforce the importance of biodiversity;

·       update the response to tick boxes in questions 29, 53 and 57; and

·       concern over shooting in woodlands.

Recommended:

(1)            That, subject to any additional comments, the Council’s response to the consultation on the draft Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan at Appendix 2 of the report be agreed.